More On the Lab Leak Hypothesis

[Bob In PA]

Novel means new and unique, new viruses occur frequently and they are all given that label.   

Since almost all of these viruses are zoonotic in origin, there will be little learned (beyond satisfying scientific curiosity) in learning which animal it came from (unless it was an unusual interaction with an animal)

Rich: I understand, and it's a good point but... (I hope I have this right; if not, I have no doubt you will correct me LOL)....

The precise type of mutation for THIS coronavirus is different from the microbes you cited. I am far from sure, but I think it is MORE novel, and that is a reason why some scientists suspect it may have been man-made.

Here's the link... it's a very scientifically-worded document... not fit for Giants' fans like me LOL... but I believe that's at least part of what they're saying.

Bob

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210217/The-origin-of-SARS-CoV-2-furin-cleavage-site-remains-a-mystery.aspx

[MightyGiants]

Rich: I understand, and it's a good point but... (I hope I have this right; if not, I have no doubt you will correct me LOL)....

The precise type of mutation for THIS coronavirus is different from the microbes you cited. I am far from sure, but I think it is MORE novel, and that is a reason why some scientists suspect it may have been man-made.

Here's the link... it's a very scientifically-worded document... not fit for Giants' fans like me LOL... but I believe that's at least part of what they're saying.

Bob

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210217/The-origin-of-SARS-CoV-2-furin-cleavage-site-remains-a-mystery.aspx

Two points, this references preprints servers.   This did nearly as much as the right-wing propaganda machine to create misinformation during the Covid crisis.   Preprint means these are papers that were published that haven't been peer-reviewed.  Peer review is a critical safeguard in science, and the heavy use of preprint servers defeated that safeguard and allowed misinformation to propagate


Because the safeguard was removed this OB/GYN doc just pushed the now pretty much debunked claims of the infamous furin cleavage site

At this point, the consensus is there is nothing about the structure of the virus to suggest it was man-made.  Doesn't preclude being man-made but there is nothing to suggest it was.   Still, isn't creating doubt and suspicion the point of this thread? 

[Bob In PA]

Two points, this references preprints servers.   This did nearly as much as the right-wing propaganda machine to create misinformation during the Covid crisis.   Preprint means these are papers that were published that haven't been peer-reviewed.  Peer review is a critical safeguard in science, and the heavy use of preprint servers defeated that safeguard and allowed misinformation to propagate

Because the safeguard was removed this OB/GYN doc just pushed the now pretty much debunked claims of the infamous furin cleavage site

At this point, the consensus is there is nothing about the structure of the virus to suggest it was man-made.  Doesn't preclude being man-made but there is nothing to suggest it was.   Still, isn't creating doubt and suspicion the point of this thread?

Rich: I see that now (it's right there at the bottom of the page after the conclusion, but I quit reading when the article ended).

I don't think the article has been around long enough for peer review but I will try to search for it, assuming you have not already done so.

Thanks for the help.

Bob

[MightyGiants]

Rich: I see that now (it's right there at the bottom of the page after the conclusion, but I quit reading when the article ended).

I don't think the article has been around long enough for peer review but I will try to search for it, assuming you have not already done so.

Thanks for the help.

Bob

I don't think the article itself rises to the level of a study or report, so it will not be peer-reviewed.   Rather I talking about the study she referenced in her article.  Actually, she mentioned the Preprint server at the beginning.  I am assuming that you were not familiar with what a preprint server was or the ramifications of preprint.   You are correct at the bottom of the article they did explain preprint.   Circling back, an OB/GYN doctor really isn't qualified to speak on the genetic structure of a virus.    That's why her article referenced the study.   As I said, non-peer-reviewed studies are not safe sources of scientific intel.

[bldevil]

Looks like Biden has joined the right-wing conspiracy theorists:

"President Biden said Wednesday that he has asked the intelligence community to determine the origin of the coronavirus pandemic, a major departure from the previous White House position that the World Health Organization should lead efforts to uncover the contagion

[bldevil]

And now Fauci concurs there is more need for investigation:
"
At a White House briefing Tuesday, Anthony S. Fauci, the government

[MightyGiants]

I come to realize none of you guys really understand how science works.  You all are posting articles and making claims.   This isn't politics.  The loudest and the most articles don't "win".   In science, we sit back and wait for the results from the data and the studying.   I can understand why Donald Trump betrayed his country to ask Ukraine to investigate Biden.   You guys wouldn't care to wait for results you would have just said he is guilty.


That said, I disagree with Biden setting a timeline for a report.   That is not how you achieve proper or good results.   An investigation should be allowed to take the time it needs

[katkavage]

I come to realize none of you guys really understand how science works.  You all are posting articles and making claims.   This isn't politics.  The loudest an the most articles doesn't "win".   In science we sit back and wait for the results from the data and the studying.   I can understand why Donald Trump betrayed his country to ask the Ukraine to investigate Biden.   You guys wouldn't care to wait for results you would have just said he is guilty.


That said, I disagree with Biden setting a timeline for a report.   That is not how you achieve proper or good results.   An investigation should be allowed to take the time it needs

Everything is politics with these guys. It's fed to then constantly by Fox, News max
, and other hate machines.

[Bob In PA]

The "gods" of Facebook speaketh....

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/facebook-no-longer-banning-posts-161904256.html

[MightyGiants]

The "gods" of Facebook speaketh....

https://about.fb.com/news/2020/04/covid-19-misinfo-update/#removing-more-false-claims

Can't wait for the actual facts to come out from an investigation.   You have to keep pushing BS like this to promote your political agenda.    The only thing you accomplished with this post is to bump up your political propaganda thread.   Talking about a remote possibility is just nearly as beneficial to your political agenda as actually proving it happened.   This isn't remotely science and this thread has NOTHING to do with science

[philo43]

Mighty,

I have stayed completely out of this thread, because you and I are toxic.  However I am going to post to hopefully make you take a step back and realize how you make everything political.  These are some of your replies from just the 1st 3 pages of this thread.

[Bob In PA]

Can't wait for the actual facts to come out from an investigation.   You have to keep pushing BS like this to promote your political agenda.    The only thing you accomplished with this post is to bump up your political propaganda thread.  Talking about a remote possibility is just nearly as beneficial to your political agenda as actually proving it happened.  This isn't remotely science and this thread has NOTHING to do with science

Rich: Politicians politicized the virus.  I personally had NOTHING to do with it, and I don't believe I should pay the price of their stupidity by having to "tread softly" when posting news related to the virus.

Facebook's changed stance vis-a-vis posts relating to the virus is very instructive.  It shows conclusively IMO that it is a BAD IDEA to try to censor scientific thought.

QUALIFIED people expressing minority viewpoints MUST ALWAYS AND FOREVER be heard, and never muzzled or evaluated by non-scientists.  If they're wrong, they'll all too soon make fools of themselves.

Bob

[MightyGiants]

Mighty,

I have stayed completely out of this thread, because you and I are toxic.  However I am going to post to hopefully make you take a step back and realize how you make everything political.  These are some of your replies from just the 1st 3 pages of this thread.

[MightyGiants]

Rich: Politicians politicized the virus.  I personally had NOTHING to do with it, and I don't believe I should pay the price of their stupidity by having to "tread softly" when posting news related to the virus.

Facebook's changed stance vis-a-vis posts relating to the virus is very instructive.  It shows conclusively IMO that it is a BAD IDEA to try to censor scientific thought.

QUALIFIED people expressing minority viewpoints MUST ALWAYS AND FOREVER be heard, and never muzzled or evaluated by non-scientists.  If they're wrong, they'll all too soon make fools of themselves.

Bob

Your "news" about Facebook (along others) was not news.   If I take your claims about this being a thread about science at face value, then we are talking about the virus and its origins.   In no way shape or form did Facebook's opinion about the possibility of a lab accident change the FACT or the SCIENCE in terms of discovering the origins of the virus.  So it was not "news" other than in the political propaganda sense

Instead, it was just you engaging in the right wing's favorite logical fallacy-   argumentum ad populum


In other words, if Facebook (and others) said that, then Covid must have escaped from a lab because look at all the people who are saying it's possible


This has NOTHING to do with censorship and everything to do with the extremely toxic right-wing propaganda that has been and continues to harm our nation.     

[Bob In PA]

Your "news" about Facebook was not news.   If I take your claims about this being a thread about science at face value, then we are talking about the virus and its origins.   In no way shape or form did Facebook's opinion about the possibility of a lab accident change the FACT or the SCIENCE in terms of discovering the origins of the virus.  So it was not "news" other than in the political propaganda sense

Instead, it was just you engaging in the right wing's favorite logical fallacy-   argumentum ad populum

In other words, if Facebook said that, then Covid must have escaped from a lab because look at all the people who are saying it's possible

This has NOTHING to do with censorship and everything to do with the extremely toxic right-wing propaganda that has been and continues to harm our nation.   

Rich:  The fact that numerous unqualified people agree with (or like) a qualified scientific hypothesis has no bearing upon the correctness or validity of the hypothesis.  Bob